The AMD Radeon R9 Nano Review: The Power of Size
by Ryan Smith on September 10, 2015 8:00 AM ESTTotal War: Attila
The second strategy game in our benchmark suite, Total War: Attila is the latest game in the Total War franchise. Total War games have traditionally been a mix of CPU and GPU bottlenecks, so it takes a good system on both ends of the equation to do well here. In this case the game comes with a built-in benchmark that plays out over a large area with a fortress in the middle, making it a good GPU stress test.
Yet again the R9 Nano has a solid lock on 4th place here, trailing the other two Fiji cards and then the GTX 980 Ti. The card does slightly better than average against the R9 Fury, coming within 96% of the performance of its sibling even at 3840x2160 at Quality settings.
Size-wise and power-wise, the R9 Nano is also consistently in the lead. Against the GTX 970 Mini this is anywhere between 11% and 22%, while against the GTX 980 it’s a much smaller 2-10% lead.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
284 Comments
View All Comments
Qwertilot - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
Also Intel's 35w quad cores seem to be getting rather fast nowadays, so overall system power/a very quiet CPU cooler is much easier to handle. Not many really tiny cases mind.Also maybe a question of if you want to go one fan for something with this much power draw - it can be tamed to very, very quiet by 2 fan designs.
mosu - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
I wonder how Nvidia will manage HBM2 with no previous experience with HBM. Maybe TSMC will borrow some for them...nathanddrews - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
Probably just fine seeing as they have been designing Pascal for a few years and they just began sampling a few months ago, meaning they likely have working chips in their labs right now. AMD managed fine with their first implementation. Intel seems to be doing well with their version of stacked memory. Samsung and Toshiba are also doing fine. No one would be bringing it to the consumer market if they didn't already have a good handle on it.Michael Bay - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
I will be an asshole and remind everybody that there is _still_ no 960 review.MrSpadge - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
What exactly would you expect from an AT review now that can not already be found elsewhere? I know they said a review would be coming, but seriously.. let them focus on important topics.bill.rookard - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
You are absolutely right. On both points.Mikemk - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
Really?extide - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
They SAID that there will not be a 960 review.Oxford Guy - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
Because the 960 was a poor product that made Nvidia look bad?D. Lister - Wednesday, September 16, 2015 - link
No, because AT was understaffed and they kept delaying it, until they realised that they were so late (compared to other sites) that the meager hits their review would get, wouldn't be worth the effort that they would have to put in.As for your inability to find a review, allow me to assist:
https://www.google.com/search?q=960+review&rlz...